Air carrier mdt departed den in violation of minimum equipment list requirement.

Attributes
ACN	95766
Time
Date	198810
Day	Sun
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	airport : den
State Reference	CO
Altitude	agl bound lower : 0 agl bound upper : 0
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Medium Transport, High Wing, 2 Turboprop Eng
Flight Phase	climbout : takeoff
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : commercial
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 280 flight time total : 3000
ASRS Report	95766
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Events
Anomaly	aircraft equipment problem : critical non adherence : far non adherence : published procedure
Independent Detector	aircraft equipment other aircraft equipment : unspecified
Resolutory Action	none taken : anomaly accepted other
Consequence	faa : reviewed incident with flight crew
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Aircraft
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

Taxiing out from denver's stapleton airport we noticed a dc gen fault light. We then consulted the MEL and determined it could be deferred and upon contacting dispatch they agreed. When climbing out of den we re-examined the MEL and found the dc gen cannot be deferred. We contacted dispatch and they agreed at which point we returned to den. Part of the problem was miscom between the flight crew and dispatch (and the mechanic who was in dispatch at the time). Dispatch believed the problem was only the light itself instead of the gen (this is also what the crew was looking at in the MEL when they made the error). I think the MEL could be worded differently to be more understandable under this particular item, 'dc gen fault and light system.' also the crew, dispatch and maintenance could have a better understanding of the MEL and communicate more effectively about maintenance problems.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR MDT DEPARTED DEN IN VIOLATION OF MINIMUM EQUIPMENT LIST REQUIREMENT.

Narrative: TAXIING OUT FROM DENVER'S STAPLETON ARPT WE NOTICED A DC GEN FAULT LIGHT. WE THEN CONSULTED THE MEL AND DETERMINED IT COULD BE DEFERRED AND UPON CONTACTING DISPATCH THEY AGREED. WHEN CLBING OUT OF DEN WE RE-EXAMINED THE MEL AND FOUND THE DC GEN CANNOT BE DEFERRED. WE CONTACTED DISPATCH AND THEY AGREED AT WHICH POINT WE RETURNED TO DEN. PART OF THE PROB WAS MISCOM BTWN THE FLT CREW AND DISPATCH (AND THE MECH WHO WAS IN DISPATCH AT THE TIME). DISPATCH BELIEVED THE PROB WAS ONLY THE LIGHT ITSELF INSTEAD OF THE GEN (THIS IS ALSO WHAT THE CREW WAS LOOKING AT IN THE MEL WHEN THEY MADE THE ERROR). I THINK THE MEL COULD BE WORDED DIFFERENTLY TO BE MORE UNDERSTANDABLE UNDER THIS PARTICULAR ITEM, 'DC GEN FAULT AND LIGHT SYS.' ALSO THE CREW, DISPATCH AND MAINT COULD HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF THE MEL AND COMMUNICATE MORE EFFECTIVELY ABOUT MAINT PROBS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.